LABOR, SI! UNIONS, NO!

A few weeks ago Michael Novak argued (NR, April 6) that conservatives don’t pay enough attention to “labor,” and that “laboring people” tend also to be “family people, oriented toward ‘conservative’ social and moral values.” I couldn’t agree more. A political movement that does not enjoy the support of working people is likely to be little more than an attempt to consolidate privilege. That is exactly what is wrong with present-day liberalism. It is an alliance of elites who have attempted to enlist the support of working people as dependents rather than as equals.

Novak added: “In foreign policy, I would trust labor-union leaders ahead of bankers 99 per cent of the time.” I agree there, too. And it occurs to me: Is there any way we can find employment for the AFL-CIO leadership at the State Department? Labor leaders at least understand that some people are on your side and others are not. This clarity has a way of eluding both bankers and State Department “wets.”

Featured Tags

A few weeks ago Michael Novak argued (NR, April 6) that conservatives don’t pay enough attention to “labor,” and that “laboring people” tend also to be “family people, oriented toward ‘conservative’ social and moral values.” I couldn’t agree more. A political movement that does not enjoy the support of working people is likely to be little more than an attempt to consolidate privilege. That is exactly what is wrong with present-day liberalism. It is an alliance of elites who have attempted to enlist the support of working people as dependents rather than as equals.

Novak added: “In foreign policy, I would trust labor-union leaders ahead of bankers 99 per cent of the time.” I agree there, too. And it occurs to me: Is there any way we can find employment for the AFL-CIO leadership at the State Department? Labor leaders at least understand that some people are on your side and others are not. This clarity has a way of eluding both bankers and State Department “wets.”